Tuesday, November 03, 2015

Mark Stern at Slate is glad the Mets lost the World Series because he thinks that their star infielder is "noxious":

The Kansas City Royals defeated the New York Mets 7–2 on Sunday night, winning the World Series in just five games. I am agnostic as to which team deserved to take the crown. But I’m thrilled that Mets (former) fan favorite and fomenter of homophobia Daniel Murphy played a crucial role in bringing his team to an embarrassing defeat.

These unqualified plaudits may have been merited. But they gloss over the fact that Murphy is perhaps the most explicitly and unabashedly anti-gay figure in major league sports today. Earlier this year, Murphy unloaded his thoughts about Billy Bean, an openly gay retired player and Major League Baseball’s Ambassador for Inclusion:

I disagree with his lifestyle. I do disagree with the fact that Billy is a homosexual. That doesn’t mean I can’t still invest in him and get to know him. I don’t think the fact that someone is a homosexual should completely shut the door on investing in them in a relational aspect. Getting to know him. That, I would say, you can still accept them but I do disagree with the lifestyle, 100 percent.

Murphy then tried to qualify his statement, comparing homosexuality to undesirable personality traits like “pride”:

Maybe, as a Christian, that we haven’t been as articulate enough in describing what our actual stance is on homosexuality. We love the people. We disagree the lifestyle. That’s the way I would describe it for me. It’s the same way that there are aspects of my life that I’m trying to surrender to Christ in my own life. There’s a great deal of many things, like my pride.

Of course, Murphy has every right to hold these beliefs, which earned him praise from such luminaries as the Westboro Baptist Church. He does not have a right to expand on them without discipline. Had an MLB player said something bigoted about a black or Jewish player, the league would have reprimanded him. Instead, it took no serious action against Murphy, effectively ratifying his views as reasonable and harmless.

They are not.

This is the state of discourse today with radical secularists and elements of the religious left. Mr. Murphy's "explicitly and unabashedly anti-gay" comments seem to me to be most tame, seem to me to be nothing more than an expression and application of considered Christian thought but Stern sees it to be nothing less than what he later in the piece calls "noxious personal prejudice."

It is Stern that is most explicitly and unabashedly displaying noxious personal prejudice. And he's doing so under what he wants the rest of us to believe is the banner of tolerance and open-mindedness.

It will of course only get worse. Religious expression in the common square is quickly becoming anathema and Stern's perspective will prevail in the not too distant future.

Sunday, September 06, 2015

My priest this morning, during his homily, referenced ABC 20/20's airing Friday night of Pope Francis and The Peopleand I was moved by his words, so moved in fact that I made the decision to watch the show for myself as soon as I could. I finished doing so just moments ago.

It was all that Father Mike had portrayed it to be and more. You should set out to watch it yourself. It'll enhance the faith of the faithful and should give food for thought to those who might consider themselves something other than faithful.

During a “townhall” styled meeting the pope singled the nun out before the crowd.

“I want to thank you,” Francis said. “And through you to thank all the sisters of religious orders in the U.S. for the work that you have done and that you do in the United States. It’s great. I congratulate you. Be courageous. Move forward.

And then the pope, 78, said something she could never have imagined: “I’ll tell you one other thing. Is it inappropriate for the Pope to say this? I love you all very much.“

ABC and multiple other news outlets presented this little scene as if the Pope just somehow happened to spot Pimentel on a TV monitor “hiding” in the crowd and that it was all a big, heartwarming surprise. But, it is obvious that this was an orchestrated event and not spontaneous at all. Francis set this up ahead of time in order to give the USA another jab in the ribs, something he has become well known for at this point.

If you've not watched the referenced segment on 20/20, you might be excused for the kind of attitude and cynicism on display here but, if you did indeed watch it and you continue to be this disdainful, it's an indication of a hardness of heart that Christ alone will have to pierce. To suggest that the Pope's singling out of this nun during the virtual audience was anything but spontaneous is to have watched a show I didn't see and seemingly, to make things up out of whole cloth. It's a baseless and shameful charge.

But no more baseless and shameful than Huston's attack against this faithful nun merely carrying out her vocation faithfully, lovingly and diligently.

Mr. Huston, and the stone-hearted who applaud his thinking, have indicted her because she dared to see Christ in the least of these, she dared to assist those fleeing their homelands and the infestation of gangs and violence therein, she dared to set aside politics, she dared to see their humanity, she dared to be Christ to them.

In other words, this nun acted out her faith, acted like her savior Jesus Christ, and in that acting, committed the cardinal sin of offending Huston's idol, political ideology. How dare she? Who does she think she is?

But wait, there's more that offended Mr. Huston's sensibilities, more that upset his applecart of ideological idolatry.

Mr. Huston was deeply offended by the Pope's plan to use his native tongue at the Mass to be held in DC during his U.S. visit later this month:

"... in order to scold the U.S.A. over its already too generous immigration policies, Francis is purposefully giving a Mass in Spanish despite that less than 15 percent of the United States even speaks the language.

...

Next Francis has decided to rub America’s nose in its immigration problems by giving his Papal Mass in Washington in Spanish instead of English.

This is a purely political move, one meant as a slam on one of the most generous nations on the planet, one that already ranks number one in the world in the sheer number of legal immigrants is allows in, not to mention illegal ones.

Certainly there is good reason for a religious leader to speak up in the USA–what with the Obama administration’s campaign to put an end to religious liberty and to destroy Christianity–but what is the red pope doing? He’s attacking Americans for wanting to have some control over their own immigration policy and essentially calling the whole country a bunch of racists.

Instead of being a religious leader, this pope is using his position to play anti-American politics.

This pope is a disaster."

Incredible.

By speaking Spanish, the man's native tongue, the Pope according to Huston is rubbing America's nose in its immigration policies, scolding the U.S.A., slamming America, attacking America, calling Americans racists and playing anti-American political games.

By. Speaking. Spanish.

His. Native. Tongue.

With all due respect to Mr. Huston and those who find his writing fruitful and productive, his thinking on this is banal and infantile, beyond comprehension for those who think rationally.

To read the sort of mindlessness referenced into the circumstance of a nun living out her faith and the rather natural act of a Pope speaking in his native tongue, is to stretch the limits of credulity.

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Facebook apologized to drag queens on Wednesday following a meeting with community members and queens who protested against the company’s order to use their legal names on the social networking site.

Facebook’s chief product officer, Chris Cox, said: “I want to apologise to the affected community of drag queens, drag kings, transgender, and extensive community of our friends, neighbours, and members of the LGBT community for the hardship that we’ve put you through in dealing with your Facebook accounts over the past few weeks.”

“The spirit of our policy is that everyone on Facebook uses the authentic name they use in real life. For Sister Roma, that’s Sister Roma. For Lil Miss Hot Mess, that’s Lil Miss Hot Mess,” said Cox. “Part of what’s been so difficult about this conversation is that we support both of these individuals, and so many others affected by this, completely and utterly in how they use Facebook.”

Just a brief note to inform you that I have been blocked from Facebook. They claim that Msgr. Charles Pope is not my real name and are requiring me to submit government ID proving that Msgr. Charles Pope is my true identity. As of now, I have no intention of doing this since I consider it an unreasonable demand by them. They further indicate that even if I supply the IDs from at least two sources, that they reserve the right not to reactivate my account if the name I have used does not meet their preferences.

They explain the reason for their action as:

We ask everyone on Facebook to use the name they go by in everyday life so friends know who they’re connecting with

But of course this IS the name that I go by “in everyday life.” Further, I have had a Facebook account under the name of “Msgr. Charles Pope” for over 6 years now. This is my name, this is who I am. I have 5,000 friends on Facebook who know me by this.

Facebook of course is a private company and they can do whatever they want and treat their clients and users in whatever foul ways they wish. But my current stance on this matter is to resist their demand and seek to share my dissatisfaction.

Facebook was once an open forum to discuss and share. It has become increasingly autocratic and ideological. It may be time for many of us to encourage them to reform or to simply leave Facebook.

I respect that some of you may differ with my assessment of things, but I did want to explain my sudden absence from Facebook and I request your help in spread this information with others you think might wonder as to my disappearance from that forum.

My Twitter Feed is @MsgrPope

I'm sure this has nothing to do with religion, particularly the Catholic religion.

Wednesday, May 13, 2015

That from Deacon Greg Kandra, reacting to ABC's new Catholic bashing TV show slated to premiere in the fall. He's got a trailer up that I find disgusting and far from funny.

That this kind of garbage is allowed to air on a major network, particularly one owned by Disney, speaks volumes to how low the culture has sunk. But we can't be surprised given who the show's executive producer is.

"The most incredibly vicious anti-Catholic in America is Dan Savage. What he has said about Catholicism is so vile that Disney would never air it. To offer this malicious bigot a show is the height of irresponsibility."- Bill Donohue, President, Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights

“Unfortunately, Dan Savage's public persona is completely opposite to wholesome role model for kids. His crass and even vitriolic disparaging of certain faiths and family values, and his aggressive agenda of promoting dangerous, deviant sexual experimentation couldn't have escaped Disney's or ABC's attention. To see the network that brought us Cinderella endorse a man like this should outrage every American who cares about our children and our culture.”- Lila Rose, President, Live Action

"Dan Savage recently made a lewd smear against Pope John Paul II on Twitter in which he accused him of being a child molester. This is sadly typical of Dan Savage, who has a history of making X-rated personal attacks. Why would Disney hire this man for one of their TV shows? And why would advertisers want to be associated with such vile attacks on Catholics?"- Brian Burch, President, CatholicVote.org

"These thugs will 'savage' Catholics for their religious beliefs, and then put on fundraisers to advocate tolerance for any other minority. This hits a new low for an industry that has sunk to the depths of depravity and religious hatred. The two halves of the First Amendment fit together. Those who claim free speech for the news and entertainment media, yet freely discriminate against Catholics, forget that there is no authentic free speech if there is no freedom of religion. The First Amendment will not stand in a society that has no respect for its citizens' religious beliefs."- Patrick J. Reilly, President, The Cardinal Newman Society

"Dan Savage has said some of the most vile and disgusting things about Christians that have ever been heard in America. He has publicly encouraged sexual violence against them and said they were deserving of death by torture. The fact that ABC would voluntarily work with such an extreme person to promote his immoral, hateful agenda is problematic in the extreme."- John-Henry Westen, Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief, LifeSiteNews

"Dan Savage is called a pro-gay activist but what I know of him is that he is against just about everything, including the family. Disney will likely feel its decision to base a show on his life where it hurts the most - in its deep pockets."- Father Frank Pavone, President, Priests for Life

“Dan Savage’s hatred for those with whom he disagrees is a matter of public record, as are his many vile taunts and fantasies. If ABC does give him a platform from which to further spread his venom, then let this be the end of the claim that ‘neutral’ media such as ABC just want to promote tolerance. Anti-Christian bigotry is absolutely alright with ABC, so let’s do away with the pretense that this is just about entertainment.”- Stephen Phelan, Director of Mission Communications, Human Life International

"The idea that the vulgar, insulting, outrageous Dan Savage would rate consideration for a sitcom on ABC Disney only confirms the obvious fact that, culturally, our nation is in a moral free fall. What other reason could there be for partnering with a man who has spent much of his adult life insulting God, His followers, and His Church? How low will society go before courageous Americans stand up and say enough? The time is now to raise our voices. Join us in opposing this most recent embrace of media bigotry that has no place in a civilized nation."- Judie Brown, President, American Life League Inc.

“Disney sold out years ago, but to produce a show based on the life of a radical bigot like Dan Savage is a slap in the face to Catholics across the country. The Lepanto Institute is more than happy to join in the campaign against this program. Anti-Family propaganda like this must never see the light of day.”- Michael Hichborn, President, Lepanto Institute

Friday, May 01, 2015

Sister Diana wants to tell Americans about ISIS persecution of Christians in Iraq, but the State Department won’t let her in. Why is the United States barring a persecuted Iraqi Catholic nun — an internationally respected and leading representative of the Nineveh Christians who have been killed and deported by ISIS — from coming to Washington to testify about this catastrophe? Earlier this week, we learned that every member of an Iraqi delegation of minority groups, including representatives of the Yazidi and Turkmen Shia religious communities, has been granted visas to come for official meetings in Washington — save one. The single delegate whose visitor visa was denied happens to be the group’s only Christian from Iraq.

Sister Diana Momeka of the Dominican Sisters of Saint Catherine of Siena was informed on Tuesday by the U.S. consulate in Erbil that her non-immigrant-visa application has been rejected. The reason given in the denial letter, a copy of which I have obtained, is: You were not able to demonstrate that your intended activities in the United States would be consistent with the classification of the visa. She told me in a phone conversation that, to her face, consular officer Christopher Patch told her she was denied because she is an “IDP” or Internally Displaced Person. “That really hurt,” she said. Essentially, the State Department was calling her a deceiver. The State Department officials made the determination that the Catholic nun could be falsely asserting that she intends to visit Washington when secretly she could be intending to stay. That would constitute illegal immigration, and that, of course, is strictly forbidden. Once here, she could also be at risk for claiming political asylum, and the U.S. seems determined to deny ISIS’s Christian victims that status. In reality, Sister Diana wanted to visit for one week in mid-May.

I think we'd be hard-pressed to find an administration more hostile to Christians, particularly Catholics.

"To help white people to find new ways to talk about racism we have to ban them from saying the words 'Martin', 'Luther', 'King', & 'junior'," he tweeted. The tweet received support, but was later shredded by critics.

...

This isn't the first time Bell has suggested silencing white people. In 2013, Bell said white people -- especially white journalists -- should simply shut up about race because in his view, it's not their job to discuss the issue.

"The worst thing to say to a person of color is, ‘I don’t think that’s racist,’" he said. "I don’t think that’s your area. You can have an opinion but I don’t think you are the final word. That’s what’s missing, white people. You’ve got a lot of jobs, but should not have the ‘I know what’s racist’ job. I know what’s imperialism – that’s your job.”

Bell was not the only Hollywood liberal to suggest white people be banned from mentioning King. Mark Ruffalo, the actor who plays Bruce Banner in the upcoming Avengers movie, said on Twitter that whites should stop mentioning Martin Luther King and the riots in Baltimore.

"Dear White America: beautifully written," he said. "Please Stop Talking About Martin Luther King Jr. and the Baltimore 'Riots'." His tweet included a link to an article at the far-left wing Daily Kos that said the "killing of Freddie Gray, an unarmed black man who was a victim of racial profiling and harassment by police, is the proximate cause" of the riots in Baltimore.

Gray, the Washington Post said, was in custody so often that officers said they could identify him by name from surveillance video. His injuries, the Post added, remain the subject of local and federal investigations, but some reports claim he had spinal and neck surgery a week before his final run-in with officers. Nevertheless, the Post said, Gray was never placed in a seat belt and made multiple requests for medical attention.

"Perhaps it would be best if most Americans simply took Dr. King out of their mouths, defaulting to different wisdom as offered by other people, for they are not really interested in understanding the true power of Brother Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.'s radical vision and truth-telling about white supremacy and class inequality in America," said the Daily Kos, ending the line with a question mark. The meaning of the piece, is quite clear. White people should just shut up and let looters destroy Baltimore. To do otherwise would be racist.

Increasingly today, people are being told to shut up, to be quiet, to pipe down, or my personal favorite, to tone things down, to dial things back.

Apparently, Bell and Ruffalo and the Daily Kos, knowing that what was happening in Baltimore doesn't square well with the non-violent teachings of Martin Luther King Jr., would rather not be reminded of the fact and people who do the reminding need to shut up, need to tone it down, need to dial it back.

It's become the way of the world today.

Truth is so damned offensive. And those who speak truth should shut the hell up.

To which I say simply... no.

Hell. No.

Never.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it Mr. Bell, Mr. Ruffalo, you folks at the Daily Kos and anyone else so easily offended by the expression of truth.

Tuesday, April 21, 2015

In a saner time, the questions Ryan wants to raise are exactly the ones we should be debating. I think the answers would still come out against him, but Enlightenment reason has as only one of its themes the corrosive destruction of enchanted medievalisms. Isn’t it another theme of Enlightenment reason, the positive one, that we need deep concern for our policy choices, deep research about sociological impacts, and profound thought about the effects on political foundation?

In a world where an Indiana pizza parlor can be shut down—then receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations—for what was in essence not even a crime of wrong action but wrong thought, we have moved into a world of metonymy, where an argument is judged not by its argumentation but by its symbolic place.

You could trace all this through the sadly hilarious videoof Ryan’s having his microphone cut off on an MSNBC program this March. An even more recent spat shows the pattern, as well. On April 15, a not-bad profile of Ryan appeared in the Washington Post. The writer’s voice was mostly one of bemusement that someone not obviously insane could oppose same-sex marriage, but within the confines of that voice, the piece was respectful and interested. As schools are wont to do, his old high school, the Friends School of Baltimore, put on its Facebook page a link to this profile of one of its increasingly famous graduates—only to replace it quickly with a message from the headmaster groveling over this failure to grasp the true inwardness of the bigotry and evil manifest in his school’s former student.

The most ironic part may be this: Opposition to same-sex marriage is commonly caricatured as a religious prejudice, and against such prejudice stand the forces of reason, rational argument, and thoughtful debate. But on the ground, where Ryan has taken his stand, it’s far too often the supporters of same-sex marriage who are reacting religiously—symbolically and metonymically, in horror at the evil-mindedness of their opponents. And Ryan who has quixotically, naively, and old-fashionedly assumed that this is all a debate about public reason, rational choice, and political theory.

Excellent piece... read it all... but know what Mr. Bottums' bottum line is.

Marriage as we know it will soon be completely redefined and it'll have nothing to do with reason. It instead will have everything to do with emotion.

Mitchell Primary School officials have drawn criticism from some parents after a children’s book about a transgender child was read to most of the school's students.

During a lesson on tolerance and acceptance implemented by the guidance department, the book “I Am Jazz” by Jessica Herthel and Jazz Jennings was read to 20 of 22 classes in the Grades K-3 school. The story is about a young child “with a boy’s body but a girl’s brain,” who goes through a childhood struggle of identifying with her true self until she and her family speak with a new doctor and come to understand the child is transgender.

Superintendent of Schools Allyn Hutton said it was an oversight that parents weren't notified in advance of the lesson.

“We have a practice of if a topic is considered sensitive, parents should be informed,” Hutton said Friday morning. “In this situation, that didn’t happen. The whole culture at Mitchell School is about teaching tolerance and respect. The people presenting the lesson thought (the book) was one more piece of teaching that lesson. In retrospect, we understand that toleration is tolerating people of all opinions.”

Hutton said educating students about transgender people is important because there are students within the district who identify as such.

...

A parent of a transgender child in the Kittery school system provided a statement about the school’s lesson. The parent requested anonymity to protect the identity of his child.

“We fully support the staff of Horace Mitchell School,” the statement began. “People in this country, parents in this country are outraged by bullying, teen suicide rates and the depression in children. The staff of Mitchell School is doing something about this. By teaching acceptance and love they are shedding a light on (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or questioning) issues. Reading ‘I Am Jazz’ by Jazz Jennings to students is a way of showing them that gender can be more complicated than just boys and girls. Some people are born somewhere in between. LGBTQ issues should never be classified as a ‘sensitive subject’ — there is nothing sensitive about the way we are born. Blonde hair, brown hair, gay, straight or somewhere in-between, we are all people and we all need acceptance.”

...

“The Kittery School District embraces diversity and is committed to creating an atmosphere of respect and tolerance for all people, regardless of their race, religion, political belief system or sexual orientation,” the letter read. “… With this in mind, guidance staff of the Horace Mitchell School recently read aloud the book, ‘I Am Jazz,’ a book about a transgender student.

“In general, it is the practice of the (KSD) to inform parents when sensitive material is being introduced in a classroom,” it continued. “Unfortunately, this did not occur in this situation and as a result some parents were uncomfortable with the material and/or felt unprepared for follow up discussions with their children.”

I'll believe the tolerance and diversity police when they start reading books about Catholic children and their beliefs and how they should be respected and tolerated.

We have seen again and again how Christian nations can turn against the Church. Once the cycle starts, it gets uglier and uglier — until it gets so ugly that the enemies of the Church are shown up for what they are, and finally defeated.In the first part of the cycle, Christians are made to be the bad guys — they call us enemies of progress and they proclaim that our moral positions are an affront to the enlightened.

You saw this in the 20th century as Catholics became the bad guys in two places where we predominated:

In Mexico, anti-Catholic constitutions were enacted in 1857 and 1917 outlawing many of the Church’s basic functions —and elite thinkers and artists painted the Church as antiquated, authoritarian and holding back progress.

In Eastern Europe, the same phenomenon occurred in the middle of the 20th century as Catholic rights were curtailed in Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania — and the USSR.

In the next part of the cycle, they offer us the oh-so-reasonable option of just forgetting about Jesus Christ and his teachings, and going along with them.

In Mexico, that meant the Church couldn’t teach and couldn’t speak about public issues — because that would be too sectarian, of course. Then the Church had to seek certain licenses from the state in order to worship.

In Eastern Europe, life was tough for Catholics. In Poland, for instance, Church concessions were gained only if we agreed not to speak in favor of “activities hostile to the Polish People’s Republic."

Finally, the cycle crescendos to the point where the enemies of the Church openly intimidate and attack us.

In Mexico, religious orders, clerical garb and many religious celebrations were banned. Then Catholics had to fight and die for their faith, producing 25 saints and martyrs, including famous teen martyr Blessed José Sánchez del Rio and Jesuit Father Miguel Pro.

In Eastern Europe, it was worse. In Poland, schools and orphanages closed, in Romania Bibles were pulped to make toilet paper; in Albania, bishops were dressed as clowns and forced to clean public toilets. Martyrs abounded.

Ironically, official voices try to maintain an air of respectability and fairness through all of this cycle. They aren’t anti-Catholic, you see; they just fear the Church is too antagonistic — too opposed to evolving moral norms; too stuck on ancient fairy tales that hold society back.

Thursday, April 02, 2015

Memories Pizza is a nine-year-old shop in downtown Walkerton, Indiana, just a few blocks from John Glenn High School. It’s owned by an openly-Christian couple, the O’Connors, who decorate their shop with mementos of their faith in Christ. So how does a small business in a small town wind up making headlines around the world as the new avatar of Christian bigotry?

Perhaps, you say, they brought this upon themselves, seeking out publicity for their strict biblical views.

Eh…no.

Some cursory internet forensics shows how it happened…or rather, how it was made to happen.

ABC-57 reporter Alyssa Marino’s editor sends her on a half-hour drive southwest of their South Bend studio, to the small town of Walkerton (Pop. ~2,300). According to Alyssa’s own account on Twitter, she “just walked into their shop [Memories Pizza] and asked how they feel” about Indiana’s new Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Owner Crystal O’Connor says she’s in favor of it, noting that while anyone can eat in her family restaurant, if the business were asked to cater a gay wedding, they would not do it. It conflicts with their biblical beliefs. Alyssa’s tweet mentions that the O’Connors have “never been asked to cater a same-sex wedding.”

What we have here is — as we called in journalism school jargon — “no story.” Nothing happened. Nothing was about to happen.

If I were forced to mark out a story line, it would be this: A nice lady in a small town tries to be helpful and polite to a lovely young reporter from “the big city.”

In other words, Memories Pizza didn’t blast out a news release. They didn’t contact the media, nor make a stink on Twitter or Facebook. They didn’t even post a sign in the window rejecting gay-wedding catering jobs. They merely answered questions from a novice reporter who strolled into their restaurant one day – who was sent on a mission by an irresponsible news organization.

Only on ABC-57 News tonight. We went into small towns looking for reaction to the Religious Freedom Act. We found one business, just 20 miles away from a welcoming South Bend…with a very different view.

Notice that his city of South Bend is “welcoming,” but that small-town business is not. It’s very different. That’s why ABC-57 “went into small towns,” as if embarking on a safari to aboriginal lands.

Not only did ABC-57 News create that story ex nihilo (out of nothing), but the next day, the station’s Rosie Woods reported on the social-media backlash against the Christian pizza shop owners.

“Our Facebook page has been blowing up with comments after we aired that story last night,” said Woods.

At this point, even my old Leftist journalism professors would be grinding their teeth and rending their garments.

You see, not only did ABC-57 manufacture the story with an ambush interview, it then doubled-down by making the reaction to the story into another story to give the sense of momentum, as if it were growing at its own impetus. Yet, everything about it is a fabrication.

Read the whole thing. Read it all because you'll go on to read about what has happened to this business since ABC-57's piece. It's abhorrent. It should remind you of what happened in Germany in the 1930's.

The press is leading this high tech lynching of traditional Christians all under the guise of tolerance and open-mindedness while proving to be neither.

It's a travesty and if you're one who sees it as anything but then know you are soulless.